Corpus: 543,223 opinions ·
3,177 judges ·
newest 2026-06-23 · expanding
Coverage ↗
Opinion
c39:No. 16856
KERNER, Circuit Judge. I concur in the fine opinion by my Brother Swygert. I only wish to express my regret over the law’s failure to afford us a better remedy for the situation before us. Where the alleged defect in a prior conviction is apparent from the face of the record and/or the transcript, there is no problem in having the local district court determine the validity of the prior conviction. However, where, as here, the alleged defect does not appear on the face of the record or transcript or where, also as here, the transcript has been destroyed in the ordinary course of court business, the problem becomes one which requires a full evidentiary hearing. It is then that it becomes regrettable that we are apparently without the power to transfer the case back to the district in which the trial was held to have such a hearing. This is especially true here where witnesses must be transported to Chicago from Florida. The Government’s suggestion that Martinez proceed in Florida in coram nobis is impractical both because it would multiply the proceedings and because an indigent would not be required to be afforded counsel in such a proceeding.